Planned Parenthood defunding law blocked in Kan.

CBS/AP

Updated at 2:47 p.m. ET

WICHITA, Kan. - A federal judge ruled Monday that Planned Parenthood would likely succeed in overturning a new Kansas law that would deny the group access to federal family planning funding, saying he believes the law is unconstitutional and was intended to punish Planned Parenthood for advocating for abortion rights.

U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten granted Planned Parenthood of Kansas' request for a temporary injunction blocking the law, which would require the state to allocate federal family planning dollars first to public health departments and hospitals, and leave no money for Planned Parenthood or similar groups.

Planned Parenthood argued that without the injunction, it would have lost $330,000 in federal Title X annual funding and been forced to close its clinic in the western Kansas city of Hays. It contended that its 5,700 patients would face higher costs and have less access to services and longer wait or travel times for appointments.

Law defunding Ind. Planned Parenthood blocked
Feds back Planned Parenthood in defunding case
N.C. votes to defund Planned Parenthood

Planned Parenthood has sued to overturn the law, and Marten's order was to remain in effect until the case is resolved.

In his ruling, Marten agreed with Planned Parenthood's argument that the statute is unconstitutional because would impose additional restrictions on a federally-funded program, thereby violating the Supremacy Clause. He also agreed with the group's contention that the law likely violates the First and Fourteenth amendments because he believes it was intended to punish the group for advocating for abortion rights.

Even if a statute does not appear unconstitutional on its face, it is nevertheless invalid if enacted for an improper discriminatory purpose, and the evidence before the court is that it was enacted precisely for this purpose, Marten said.

"The purpose of the statute was to single out, punish and exclude Planned Parenthood," Marten said.

Bachmann: Planned Parenthood corrupt, criminal

The Title X funding at issue targets low income individuals and helps pay for reproductive health care services such as contraception, cancer screenings and testing for sexually transmitted diseases.

The state contends that the injunction was unnecessary because other entities could provide the same services that Planned Parenthood offers in Sedgwick and Ellis counties.

Monday's hearing was the first legal test of the statute. Planned Parenthood is challenging its constitutionality based on the Supremacy Clause, which prohibits states from imposing conditions of eligibility on federal programs that are not required by federal law.

Kansas has defended the statute as a matter of state sovereignty, arguing that an injunction would unconstitutionally replace the state's discretion with the court's judgment.

Peter Brownlie, president of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, said after the ruling that the judge's ruling was clear and unambiguous that the law was unconstitutional and enacted for the wrong purpose.

"We take comfort in the fact that the judge said we have a strong likelihood of prevailing on the merits when the full case is heard," Brownlie said.

Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Chanay said the state will review the judge's before determining how to proceed.

Planned Parenthood offers abortion services in Kansas only at its clinic in Overland Park, a Kansas City suburb, but it also has clinics in Wichita and Hays.

Planned Parenthood contends that the Kansas statute is part of a national campaign to cut off the entity's federal family planning money because of its advocacy of abortion rights. Similar actions to partially or fully defund Planned Parenthood were taken by state legislatures in Indiana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin.

Marten's order is the second setback for the state on the abortion issue this summer. A federal judge in Kansas City, Kan., in July issued a temporary injunction against new licensing rules for abortion providers that tell providers what drugs and equipment they must stock and set requirements for room sizes and temperatures, among other things. But the judge blocked their enforcement until a lawsuit over the rules is resolved.

[comicart-2009]

as taxpayers we do not get to determine which programs do or do not get funded. That's why we elect Senators and Congressmen/Congresswomen. There are plenty of things that I as a Democrat do not agree with, like for instance subsidies for oil companies, ethanol production (a complete waste), farm subsidies for corporations or other large farming operations, faith-based programs (such as Bush insisted on funding)and quite a number of other programs. Furthermore, as has been noted, Planned Parenthood cannot use Federal dollars to pay for abortions. There are other Federally funded abortions that do take place, but Planned Parenthood has nothing to do with them. The yearly approximation for Federally funded abortions is 150 and when right-wingers claim "I don't want my money going to abortions because I disagree with them" I say "I don't want Exxon-Mobil getting about 1billion in tax dollars when they are making 50billion a year in profits. That tax subsidy, which is ridiculous, takes more out of my Federal tax dollars than the 1/10th of 1 penny per tax payer used for Fedrally funded abortions.

[slappy_mcjohnson]

by Lifeson2112

You liberals don't have a clue. And this has nothing to do with religion.

==========

Lifeson - to say that this isn't about religion is foolish. Are you famliar with Kansas? I've lived there more than once.

[kansas1946]

I live there now and this has EVERYTHING to do with religion.

[stevex47]

Why do repubs say that want govt. out of peoples lives, then continually try to force govt. into their lives, all based on their religion.

repubs dont care that the Constitution states a seperation of church and state. Typical hypocrits.

[Lifeson2112]

The Constitution absolutely does NOT state a separation of church and state. It forbids the establishment of government religion or prohibition of the practice. You liberals don't have a clue. And this has nothing to do with religion. The argument here is making people pay their own way. As they should.

[kansas1946]

It has EVERYTHING to do with religion. And I suppose the so called protection of marriage amendment passed by the same Kansas lunatics has nothing to do with religion. Really.

[hawkman1001-2009]

Didn't Kansas also pass a law a few years ago requiring the teaching of creationism in its schools?

Kansas seem determined to legislate its way back to the 14th Century.

[kansas1946]

LOL. No, I don't think Kansas made it to the 15th century. I believe a lot of our legislators would still like to be able to burn witches. :o)

[syslmod]

Hey Einsteins out here the judge blocked the law to defund PP.

[syslmod]

Yea. Kotch will push this to the supremes

[credibility2]

It is programs like this that have contributed to the out of control spending by the government. Parenthood is a choice and an individual one. It's not the responsibility of taxpayers to pay for someone's choice. This kind of garbage has got to stop. Taxpayers are forced to pay for this program, then the poor and low-income go and continue having kids they can't afford and the taxpayers gets stuck paying for their stupidity. Enough already. Where's the personal responsibility and accountability of these types anyway?

[Hala_c]

Ever heard of a PAP smear, genius? So, we should not allow PP to provide cancer screening because they also provide abortions (just like any hospital in America)?

Are you saying that it's less costly to this country for people to get cancer and be unaware?

[stevex47]

If you were concerned about spending, PP is the last place you would cut. It's .0000000000005 compared to anything else.
But nice try and disguising your religous zealots with spending.

[agnesdeo]

Good for Kansas...let the welfare-type folk pay for their own birth control items--condoms in gas stations men's room still cost only .50 cents.

[P0ST1ING_AWAY]

Was mom to drunk to use one ???

[Former_Marine_Sgt]

your opinion is pathetic agnesdeo.

My daughter uses planned parenthood for her womens health care and she's always had a job and has never taken a dime in welfare money or any other state or federal assistance.

She represents the vast majority of people who use planned parenthood's services.

The right wing idiot's false mythology of the welfare mother is about as pathetic a lie as any I've ever heard.